Cited by 327Cancer Genomics and DiagnosticsCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research

Detecting Liquid Remnants of Solid Tumors: Circulating Tumor DNA Minimal Residual Disease

Open access
Moding, Everett J., Nabet, Barzin Y., Alizadeh, Ash A., Diehn, Maximilian·2021·Cancer Discovery

Abstract

Growing evidence demonstrates that circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) minimal residual disease (MRD) following treatment for solid tumors predicts relapse. These results suggest that ctDNA MRD could identify candidates for adjuvant therapy and measure response to such treatment. Importantly, factors such as assay type, amount of ctDNA release, and technical and biological background can affect ctDNA MRD results. Furthermore, the clinical utility of ctDNA MRD for treatment personalization remains to be fully established. Here, we review the evidence supporting the value of ctDNA MRD in solid cancers and highlight key considerations in the application of this potentially transformative biomarker.Significance: ctDNA analysis enables detection of MRD and predicts relapse after definitive treatment for solid cancers, thereby promising to revolutionize personalization of adjuvant and consolidation therapies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-21-0634

Cites

114 of 114 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [56]Pierson-Perry JF, Vaks JE, Durham AP. Evaluation of detection capability for clinical laboratory measurement procedures; approved guideline - second edition. Wayne, Pa., U.S.A: CLSI; 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moding, E. J., Nabet, B. Y., Alizadeh, A. A., & Diehn, M.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
  • Alizadeh, Ash A.
  • Diehn, Maximilian
Venue
Cancer Discovery
Published
2021-12-01
Volume
11
Issue
12
Pages
2968-2986
ISSN
  • 2159-8274 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-8290
OpenAlex
W3214322235
Cited by
325
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 75 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 1
FWCI
5.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer Discovery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • NIH (5R25CA180993)
  • Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (134031-PF-19-164-01-TBG)
  • Leukemia and Lymphoma Society NCI (R01CA257655, R01CA233975, R01CA188298)
  • NCI (R01CA188298, R01CA233975, R01CA244526, R01CA254179)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Keywords
circulating tumor DNA, minimal residual disease, solid tumors, recurrence prediction, liquid biopsy, adjuvant therapy, treatment response monitoring, liquid biopsy biomarkers, personalized treatment
MeSH terms
Circulating Tumor DNA, Humans, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Biomarkers, Tumor, Neoplasm, Residual

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review